Re: [Non-DoD Source] [RealSTMFC] Was there ever a clinic on Delano-based paint and weathering?
|
Bill,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Sorry, but you’ve “triggered” me. Please save us from the pseudo-science babble of people like your optometrist friend. Bottom line, the emission and absorption wavelengths of refracted and reflected light from a surface (ie, the “color” of that
surface) are determined by physics and are what makes any given “color” that color. That is not subject to interpretation. It is thought that individual optical receptors (rods and cones in the eye) may respond to the same wavelength differently in different
individuals. Here’s where it get tricky and your friend left out a lot of details. However, even though different eyes respond differently, your brain then “learns” that the input it receives for that wavelength is say PRR, 1930’s Freight car color. My brain
learns the same thing even though the input from my receptors may differ some. When given samples to select from, we will both be able to pick the ones that match. We will both think that these are an oxide red. Here’s where it gets weird, and maybe where
your friend is trying (and failing) to capture the weirdness. If you were to provide my brain with the input from your optical receptors, that 1930’s freight car color might look blue to me (as an extreme example), because now my brain is getting input from
receptors that are tuned differently. The color of the object has not changed, it is the PERCEPTION of the color that has changed.
So, while our biochemical perception of those may differ, our ability to perceive those colors in context is pretty much the same. I’m afraid that there is no excuse here for getting your freight car colors wrong.
Regards,
Bruce
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL
|
|
|